Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 864 posts

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#41

Post by katbyte »

rirarobo wrote: post #29
andyxor wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no, she was locked out after extracting thousands of files illegally, see Google response from January: https://venturebeat.com/2021/01/20/google-targets-ai-ethics-...

That's only if you take Google's PR at face value. Also, no where in the article nor in Google's statement do they claim that Meg Mitchell did anything "illegal". I haven't seen any details about the allegedly extracted files, so I think there's more to the story.

Its google says vs she says - honestly i take neither at face value, but i'd expect repercussions if i started download/sharing internal files en masse.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#42

Post by bachmeier »

rsj_hn wrote: post #15

>Unfireable save for clear violations of policies such as sexual harassment I would take a look at (and consider donating to) FIRE to understand the current state of academic freedom in universities. https://www.thefire.org/news-and-media/ Just to give two examples: Bret Weinstein was fired from Evergreen for not participating in a no-white-people-on-campus day (and he was also subject to credible death threats, requ…

Your comment has nothing to do with the post you're replying to. The post asked something very specific:

> How does research in an industrial lab vs. a university work, insofar as independence is concerned?

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#43

Post by gowld »

rsj_hn wrote: post #15

>Unfireable save for clear violations of policies such as sexual harassment I would take a look at (and consider donating to) FIRE to understand the current state of academic freedom in universities. https://www.thefire.org/news-and-media/ Just to give two examples: Bret Weinstein was fired from Evergreen for not participating in a no-white-people-on-campus day (and he was also subject to credible death threats, requ…

Your description of Bret Weinstein and Evergreen is substantially inaccurate, perhaps because you read Bret Weinstein's dishonest description of it (linked below).

There was no "no-white-people-on-campus" day. There was an optional off-campus field trip for a seminar aimed at people living with a white perspective.

Bret Weinstein was not fired. He resigned with $500K severance as part of a settlement agreement arising from his lawsuit against the school for failing to protect him from students who verbally harassed him.

Primary Source: https://app.leg.wa.gov/committeeschedules/Home/Document/1705...

Long-term summary of events: https://www.theolympian.com/news/local/education/article1750...

Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bret_Weinstein#Evergreen_State...

Likewise, your description of the Gordon Klein incident was grossly inaccurate, even compared to the right-wing NYPost's version of the events:

https://nypost.com/2020/06/10/ucla-suspends-professor-for-re...

He was suspended for unprofessionally mocking his students.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#44

Post by freeone3000 »

schoolornot wrote: post #28

No qualms for Googlers getting a reality check. I don't get why people think they work at a liberal think-tank where no consequences exist for sharing opinions or confidential data about the company publicly. Had someone on my team decided to write a similar doc like the one Margaret published, I'd have fired them on the spot. Shut your mouth and move on if your ideology conflicts with your employer's.

Hiring an ethics in AI research team presupposes you want to have ethics in your AI. It's disappointing, but not surprising, to find they want a bunch of syncopants. Perhaps they shouldn't have bothered creating the department if they didn't want people working there to speak out.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#45

Post by katbyte »

madamelic wrote: post #39
ggm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think society at large really benefits from employers doing things this way? If you were in the ethics department of a company, unpacked deep seated entrenched breach of social norms and were blocked from talking about it but still believed in ethics, what would you do? I am unsure I would be prepared to do what she and Timbru did but that's a long way from the implied cynicism and also frankly abject legalist…

If you fire your "Ethical AI" team lead for disagreeing with you... maybe you are only interested in the appearance of being ethical. Just a thought.

There is disagreeing with your employer and then flagrantly breaking rules and confidentiality and comparing the two like you are doing here is disingenuous.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#46

Post by skissane »

schoolornot wrote: post #28

No qualms for Googlers getting a reality check. I don't get why people think they work at a liberal think-tank where no consequences exist for sharing opinions or confidential data about the company publicly. Had someone on my team decided to write a similar doc like the one Margaret published, I'd have fired them on the spot. Shut your mouth and move on if your ideology conflicts with your employer's.

> Had someone on my team decided to write a similar doc like the one Margaret published, I'd have fired them on the spot

I sometimes don't agree with decisions my (present and past) employers have made. But I'd never go to the media or public forums with those disagreements. If I thought it was so important that I had to do that, I'd resign first.

I strenuously avoid making any public comment about my current employer. (Even past employers, I may be a little more open, but I'm still careful about what I publicly say – don't want to violate any confidentiality obligations, and don't want to unnecessarily burn bridges in case I want to seek re-employment or other commercial relations with them in the future.)

If any of my employers (current or past) caught me downloading company documents/emails/etc in order to share them with the media or other external parties – I'd expect to be fired.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#47

Post by jariel »

thewarrior wrote: post #16
andyxor wrote: post #6

Google response (from Jan): "Our security systems automatically lock an employee’s corporate account when they detect that the account is at risk of compromise due to credential problems or when an automated rule involving the handling of sensitive data has been triggered. In this instance, yesterday our systems detected that an account had exfiltrated thousands of files and shared them with multiple external account…

That seems like a pretty serious accusation. Looks like relations between management and employees has seriously deteriorated.

A company with 100 000 people will have to quite a number of staff, literally daily, for all sorts of things, it doesn't remotely imply anything about the overall relationship between staff and management.

Even when CNN, MSNBC, Business Insider 'team up' to overrepresent an issue because 'some number of Google employees walked out for some reason' - it really doesn't help tell the story of 'relations' because it's hard to fathom what the rest of the 99% of Google staff think.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#48

Post by benlumen »

I'm not interested in the details of this, but from a distance - people sure do make life difficult for themselves, bringing politics and their opinions and controversy into workplaces. It's always tech and academia, too - you'd think it'd be enough to get just paid shitloads of money for interesting knowledge work and save the drama for friends in the pub (or the bar, or whatever).

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#49

Post by Kranar »

jboog wrote: post #37
rsj_hn wrote: post #15

>Unfireable save for clear violations of policies such as sexual harassment I would take a look at (and consider donating to) FIRE to understand the current state of academic freedom in universities. https://www.thefire.org/news-and-media/ Just to give two examples: Bret Weinstein was fired from Evergreen for not participating in a no-white-people-on-campus day (and he was also subject to credible death threats, requ…

So you have one example of someone being fired at...Evergreen college or whatever And some guy who was temporarily suspended and then immediately reinstated. And this proves profs with tenure have the same or worse protections than employees of private industry? Have you ever heard of "at-will employment"?

The Evergreen example is incorrect, Bret Weinstein was not fired from Evergreen. He sued the college and resigned as part of a settlement in which he and his wife received a combined $500,000 payout.

Re: Margaret Mitchell fired from Google

#50

Post by rmk »

rsj_hn wrote: post #15

>Unfireable save for clear violations of policies such as sexual harassment I would take a look at (and consider donating to) FIRE to understand the current state of academic freedom in universities. https://www.thefire.org/news-and-media/ Just to give two examples: Bret Weinstein was fired from Evergreen for not participating in a no-white-people-on-campus day (and he was also subject to credible death threats, requ…

I realise that the corporatisation of universities and increasing monoculture/groupthink is eroding many of the protections offered to even tenured professors, but that's a different discussion. Do you have anything specific about the topic to add?
Post reply on HN